The Value of Biosimilar Medicines for Healthcare Systems

The Value of Biosimilar Medicines for Healthcare Systems Adrian van den Hoven 6 December 2017 patients • quality • value • sustainability • partnership

Medicines For Europe VISION Medicines for Europe Vision 2020 Our 5 pillars PATIENTS QUALITY VALUE SUSTAINABILITY PARTNERSHIP 2

COMPANIES ASSOCIATIONS EU Biosimilar Medicines Group Membership

Innovative specialty medicines are now targeting smaller populations with significant unmet needs AVERAGE PREVALENCE The first diseasemodifying specialty treatments Niche indications €€€ Since 2010, increased focus on significant areas of unmet need and rare diseases with no effective remedies Notes: Prevalence and Annual cost were categorised into estimated buckets; annual cost takes into account list price at time of launch. Source: Quintiles. IMS Thought Leadership Launch Excellence I and V 400 million global patients € 2000 -2010, the emergence of targeted therapies driving enhanced value and cost benefit High volume, low cost medicines treating large primary care diseases for the first time €€ The latter decades of the 20 th century 35 million global patients

Biologicals create real issue for healthcare budgets • Spending on new originator medicines exploded • Biologics growth faster than total pharma growth Is this sustainable? Sales, € billions 50 20% 40 15% 30 10% 20 5% 10 0% 0 -5% 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 BIOLOGIC MOLECULES Biologics growth Total Pharma growth Source: IMS Health, R&D Focus, May 2015; MIDAS, Q 4 2014, constant USD Source: IMS Health, MIDAS 2015 Growth, % Europe market trends Sales and Growth Global New Brand Spending Growth USD Bn

Biologicals feature among key therapies EUROPE TOP 10 PRODUCTS (SALES) 2010 -2016 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 1 LIPITOR HUMIRA HUMIRA 2 SERETIDE ENBREL HARVONI 3 HUMIRA LIPITOR ENBREL SERETIDE SOVALDI XARELTO 4 ENBREL HERCEPTIN REMICADE ENBREL 5 HERCEPTIN LOVENOX REMICADE HERCEPTIN 6 AVASTIN LOVENOX MABTHERA AVASTIN LOVENOX REMICADE SOVALDI 7 LOVENOX REMICADE MABTHERA SERETIDE MABTHERA 8 ZYPREXA MABTHERA AVASTIN LOVENOX AVASTIN MABTHERA AVASTIN 9 MABTHERA AVASTIN SPIRIVA LUCENTIS AVASTIN REMICADE 10 REMICADE SPIRIVA LYRICA SOVALDI LOVENOX VIEKIRAX Small molecule Biological

Loss of exclusivity drives interest in biosimilar medicines Key products protection expired or losing protection by 2020 Europe top molecules sales (MAT 12/2015), € EU expiry date ADALIMUMAB (Humira) 2018 ETANERCEPT (Enbrel) Expired INFLIXIMAB (Remicade) Expired TRASTUZUMAB (Herceptin) Expired BEVACIZUMAB (Avastin) IMMUNOGLOBULIN BASE (Privigen) Total ≈ € 19 BN RITUXIMAB (Mabthera) ENOXAPARIN SODIUM (Lovenox) Expired RANIBIZUMAB (Lucentis) Expired INTERFERON BETA-1 A (Rebif) Expired INSULIN GLARGINE (Lantus) Expired AFLIBERCEPT (Eylea) Billions - Source: IMS Health 2016 Expired 1 2 3 Expired 2020 7

Historically biosimilar competition restricted but the future is very different Top Biologic Therapy Areas, Europe sales (2016) Autoimmune 20% Growth Hormones 2% Historically 8% of biologics exposed to biosimilars Hematopoietic Growth Factors 2% Erythropoietins 2% Adalimumab Etanercept Infliximab Oncologics 20% Antidiabetics 9% Source: Quintiles. IMS MIDAS MAT Q 3 2016; Europe excludes Russia and Turkey Rituximab Trastuzumab Insulin glargine

Biosimilar medicines – EU at the forefront • 9 out of 10 biosimilar medicines sales take place in EU (2016) • 60% of overall biological medicines sales occur in US (2016) • Over the last 10 years, EU cumulates nearly 100% of the use and experience with biosimilar medicines Source: IMS Health MIDAS MAT Q 4 2016; Europe does not include Russia and Turkey

Value proposition of biosimilar medicines

patients • quality • value • sustainability • partnership

Biosimilar medicines Opportunity to meet unmet medical needs In some European countries, patients have less access to biological treatments for Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA)

Access to biological treatments varies greatly European among countries 0. 70 0. 61 0. 60 0. 53 TD/Capita 0. 50 Bulgaria 0. 40 Romania Poland 0. 30 0. 23 EU average 0. 20 0. 12 0. 09 0. 10 0. 00 Anti-TNF Infliximab Source: IMS Health, Generics and Biosimilars Report, 2016 Etanercept Epoetin HGH 0. 06 0. 04 Fertility GCSF

Biosimilar medicines increase patient access Change in # of treatment days (2016 vs. year before biosimilar entrance) Epoetin G-CSF (filgrastim) Growth hormone (somatropin) Anti-TNF (infliximab & etanercept) Fertility (follitropin alfa) Source: IMS Health, Generics and Biosimilars Report, 2016 BG RO PL EU +36% -38% +237% +1254% +2542% +146% +58% -32% +152% +82% +48% +190% +12% +7% +26% -27% - +45% +10%

Biosimilar medicines increase patient access Filgrastim uptake in the UK § After biosimilar launch in 2008, NICE guidelines updated for improved cost-effectiveness of biosimilar filgrastim vs. alternative treatments Standard Units (K) 1, 200 1, 000 Biosimilar launch 800 + 104% 600 § G-CSF restrictions were relaxed and usage is now recommended for primary prophylaxis of neutropenia (before: secondary prophylaxis only) § Consumption of filgrastim short-acting increased by 104% between 2009 and 2014 400 200 - 18% 0 20042005200620072008200920102011201220132014 Short acting GCSFs Long acting GCSFs Changes in developments depicted as overall change in % between 2008– 2014 (short acting) and 2010– 2014 (long acting) Source: Simon-Kucher & Partners, IMS Health, MIDAS, IMS Consulting Group, Nov 2015 § More patients access earlier in therapy cycle = Biosimilar G-CSF almost certainly improved patient outcomes

Biosimilar medicines increase prescribing autonomy for improved patient access Southern healthcare region Before: filgrastim biosimilars After: filgrastim biosimilars • Three physicians had to approve prescription of the original product due to cost • Regional authorities to relax restrictions on prescribing filgrastim biosimilars for febrile neutropenia • Prescription does not require any further authorization • Clinical use of G-CSF increased five-fold in the Southern Healthcare Region, driven by usage of biosimilar filgrastim Source: Simon-Kucher & Partners, IMS Health

Biosimilar medicines improve treatment options Their competitive drug acquisition cost makes it possible for biosimilar medicines to reach an acceptable ICER in situations where originator medicines cannot. Biosimilar medicines support improved patient access to certain therapeutic areas compared to the originator medicine Example 1: Infliximab Ankylosing spondylitis patients covered by EMA label 2015 NICE guidance recommends use of infliximab biosimilar medicines in adults with non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis According to 2008 NICE guideline, infliximab (originator) should 2008 not be used at all Example 2: Epoetin Treatment-induced anemia patients with cancer covered by EMA label According to 2014 NICE guideline, epoetin is both clinically and cost-effective 2014 According to 2008 NICE guideline, epoetin is clinically effective for cancer treatment-induced anaemia, 2008 but not cost-effective

EU experience with biosimilar medicines

Who decides what for biosimilar medicines in the EU? Scientific assessment followed by scientific opinion No interchangeability designation European Commission grants EU-wide marketing authorisation Member States: Price and reimbursement Prescribing and substitution policies

Nearly 40 EU authorised biosimilar medicines Active substance Reference product Biosimilar medicines Adalimumab (4) Humira® Amgevita®, Solymbic®, Cytelzo®, Imraldi® Bevacizumab (1)* Avastin® Mvasi® Enoxaparin sodium (2) Lovenox® Inhixa®, Thorinane® Epoetin (5) Erypo®/Eprex® Abseamed®, Binocrit®, Epoetin Alfa Hexal®, Retacrit®, Silapo® Etanercept (2) Enbrel® Benepali®, Erelzi® Filgrastim (7) Neupogen® Accofil®, Filgrastim Hexal®, Grastofil®, Nivestim®, Ratiograstim®, Tevagrastim, Zarzio® Follitropin alfa (2) Gonal f® Bemfola®, Ovaleap® Infliximab (3) Remicade® Flixabi®, Inflectra®, Remsima® Insulin glargine (2) Lantus® Abasaglar®, Lusduna® Insulin Lispro (1) Humalog® Insulin Lispro Sanofi Rituximab (6) Mab. Thera® Blitzima®, Ritemvia®, Rituzena®, Rixathon®, Riximyo®, Truxima® Somatropin (1) Genotropin® Omnitrope® Teriparatide (2) Forsteo® Movymia®, Terrosa® Trastuzumab (1)* Herceptin® Ontruzant® Source: European Medicines Agency (November 2017) - * Pending EC decision

Biosimilar medicines applications: an increasing trend Source: European Medicines Agency Annual Report 2016

2017 pipeline: More biosimilar medicines on their way November 2017 • 13 applications under evaluation by CHMP • Adalimumab (2) • Bevacizumab (2) • Infliximab (1) • Insulin glargine (1) • Pegfilgrastim (4) • Trastuzumab (3) • 2 applications with positive opinion by CHMP • Trastuzumab (1) • Bevacizumab (1)

Large Body of Confirmatory Evidence 11 Years of Biosimilar medicines Clinical Use Real-world experience Controlled experience 700 million patient days 1 “Over the last 10 years, the EU monitoring system for safety concerns has not identified any difference in the nature, severity or frequency of adverse effects between biosimilars and their reference medicine” 2 Source: Medicines for Europe information based on EMA Post-authorisation Safety Update Reports (PSURs); EMA – European Commission: Biosimilars in the EU – Information guide for healthcare professionals, 2017 (link)

Physician-led switching has been demonstrated to be safe

Switching between biologic treatment already commonly occurs Source G. Trifiro, 15 th Biosimilar Medicines Conference, 22 -2 Mar 2017, London UK

Widespread support for switching biosimilar medicines under supervision of a healthcare person National guidance Regulatory guidance “ ” Clinical guidance Authorities supporting physician-led switching No public position available Source: Medicines for Europe Internal Biosimilar Mapping

Use of biosimilar medicines varies greatly by country and therapeutic area Biosimilar penetration of accessible markets (12/2016) 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% HGH EPO INFLIXIMAB INSULIN EU SWEDEN NITED KINGDOM SPAIN SLOVENIA SLOVAKIA ROMANIA POLAND PORTUGAL NETHERLANDS NORWAY ITALY IRELAND HUNGARY GERMANY GREECE FRANCE FINLAND CZECH REPUBLIC DENMARK BULGARIA BELGIUM AUSTRIA G-CSF

High variation in infliximab biosimilar usage, EU-5 remain behind but growing. Clinical use of biosimilar etanercept growing slightly faster Biosimilar share (months after launch) Denmark (M 3) Norway (M 5) Sweden (M 4) Germany (M 5) UK (M 5) Netherlands (M 1) Etanercept 85. 3% 57. 6% 18. 0% 8. 9% 6. 6% 5. 2% Infliximab 49. 3% 14. 2% 5. 8% 10. 0% 7. 7% 0. 1% Source: Quintiles. IMS MIDAS MTH July 2016; Denmark data from MIDAS Monthly Restricted database; Latvia excluded because only biosimilar manufacturers present in market

Sustainable environment for biosimilar medicines

A sustainable policy framework Multi-stakeholder approach required • Sustainable biosimilar medicines market? • • • Patients Prescribers Payers Industry ‘Sustainable policy framework’

European Commission and EMA leading on stakeholder education on biosimilar medicines 29 Nov 2017: Now available in Bulgarian! (link) What you need to know about biosimilar medicinal products European Commission, 2013 (link) What I need to know about biosimilar medicines – Information for patients European Commission, 2016 (link) Biosimilars in the EU – Information guide for healthcare professionals EMA, 2017 (link) The impact of biosimilar competition in Europe Quintiles. IMS, 2017 (link)

In addition, industry supports the dissemination of information resources Reading List on Biosimilar Medicines Overview of positions on EU physicianled switching for biosimilar medicines IGBA Biosimilars Communication tool kit

Benefit sharing models: successful driver of biosimilar medicines use in clinical practice University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust – Managed Switching § Managed switching program – Biosimilar infliximab for IBD § Team discussions with physicians – agreement with entire medical staff § Additional staffing to implement and monitor a safe switch § Proposed switching program discussed in detail with IBD patient panel § Additional clinical monitoring and surveillance included at the request of patient panel § Some of cost-savings being reinvested in improvements of patients’ care § Continuous communication with patients during switch § 134 patients switched from originator to biosimilar infliximab, only 2 patients have requested review of the switch on medical grounds § Estimated savings after 4 months: £ 293, 000

Benefit sharing: successful driver of biosimilar medicines use in clinical practice Denmark – Good communication and direct benefits for hospitals § All 5 regions group their tenders National tender § Council for Use of Expensive Hospital Medicine (RADS) makes recommendation to national tender body AMGROS § Expert physicians in their field included in RADS § Savings from biosimilar medicines go back to the regional hospitals § Clear information for patients developed by government in consultation with payers, regulators and physicians § Attractive prices offered by companies biosimilar infliximab won the national tender § Change of RADS guidelines: biosimilar infliximab now first-line product for biological treatment in rheumatology/gastroenterology § Immediate uptake of biosimilar medicine in clinical practice

Physician incentives are essential to develop biosimilar medicines market Anti-TNF • • Hospital product Financial incentive to prescribe biosimilar medicine Massive use of biosimilar medicines Biosimilar market shares 2016 82% Insulin • • Retail product No financial incentive to prescribe biosimilar medicine Limited use of biosimilar medicines 1% Anti-TNF (infliximab + etanercept) Insulin

Procurement conditions should allow multiple players on the market Biosimilar medicine enters the market Originator and biosimilar medicines compete in same lot THERAPEUTIC EQUIVALENCE Re-opening of supply agreement within 60 days < 3 competitors free to use single- or multi-winner tender Source: http: //www. gazzettaufficiale. it/eli/id/2016/12/21/16 G 00242/sg Physicians remains in central role: § Must prescribe preferred products (= first 3 classified in the multi-winner tender) § Therapeutic continuity: § Allowed, even if medicine not ‘preferred’ but medical justification can be asked § Not allowed if the medicine did not offer to participate in the framework. ≥ 3 competitors Mandatory tenders with 3 preferred products

Setting clear ambitions for the off-patent sector as framework for policy implementation “There is the potential to realise savings […] if the NHS embraces the use of best value biological medicines in a proactive, systematic, and safe way. ” “Our aim is that at least 90% of new patients will be prescribed the best value biological medicine within 3 months of launch of a biosimilar medicine, and at least 80% of existing patients within 12 months, or sooner if possible. ” “Increase generic and biosimilar medicines use” “Promote biosimilar medicines use […] with the objective to reach an 80% use on biosimilar medicines refrence market by 2022. ”

Criteria for sustainable biosimilar market A sustainable biosimilar market should deliver: 1. Long-term-savings for healthcare system due to fair erosion with adequate volume of prescribed biosimilar medicines 2. Viable business through healthy competition of several manufacturers 1. Limited changes to pricing & market access policies over time reduce payers’ efforts and increase predictability for the industry 2. Procurement practices allow several manufacturers in the same market (e. g. by regional differentiation or multiple tender lots) 3. Physician education, communication and incentivization to ensure appropriate but cost-conscious prescribing Source: Simon-Kucher – Policy requirements for a sustainable biosimilar market

Sustainability is also supported through regulatory efficiency and convergence • The goal pursued is identical for all: Quality, Safe & Efficacious medicines for patients • Convergence of regulatory requirements benefits all • Regulators & Industry: predictability & efficiency of regulatory processes thanks to common scientific and regulatory science advances • Stakeholders: Clear communication and common understanding

Concluding Remarks

Biosimilar medicines policies will succeed through coherent and multi-stakeholder approaches > 10 years experience ~ 40 biosimilars approved 700 mio patient treatment days Communication and Education on the scientific and regulatory concepts is cornerstone Multi-stakeholder approaches translate in benefit sharing policies – tailored to the local needs Cost-efficiency gains allow re-investment in health Biosimilar competition supports healthcare budget management PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION of Biosimilar access POLICIES

Set the ambition first, then take a first concrete step “The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time in now”. Chinese proverb

REGISTRATIONS ARE OPEN patients • quality • value • sustainability • partnership